Abstract:We report radiocarbon measurements of dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) in surface water samples collected daily during cruises to the central North Pacific, the Sargasso Sea and the Southern Ocean. The ranges of Δ 14 C measurements for each cruise (11-30‰) were larger than the total uncertainty (7.8‰, 2-sigma) of the measurements. The variability is attributed to changes in the upper water mass that took place at each site over a two to four week period. These results indicate that variability of surface Δ 14 … Show more
“…Based on the uncertainty in bomb-14 C inventory (15%) and the integral of the atmosphere-ocean D 14 C gradient (5%), the uncertainty of 14 C-based exchange rates estimated to $20%. Druffel and Griffin [2008] showed that for surface samples, the total uncertainty of a DIC D 14 C value at a given site over a several week period is approximately two times the reported uncertainty ($7‰). Thus, depending on the application, post-bomb D 14 C data should consider this shortterm variability of surface ocean D 14 C values and factor this into their analysis as it might affect the estimates of air-sea CO 2 exchange rates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Druffel and Griffin [2008] showed that for surface samples, the total uncertainty of a DIC D 14 C value at a given site over a several week period is approximately two times the reported uncertainty ($7‰). Thus, depending on the application, post-bomb D 14 C data should consider this shortterm variability of surface ocean D…”
The 14C measurements in the Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal during the late 1990s offer a way to assess the temporal changes in the inventories of bomb‐14C and its penetration into the ocean, in two decades since GEOSECS expeditions (1977–1978). The mean penetration depth of bomb radiocarbon during GEOSECS (1977–1978) was 270 m, which increased by ∼40% to 381 m in 1994–1998. The small changes in bomb‐14C inventories, significant increase in the mean penetration depths and lowering of the surface Δ14C values in the northern Indian Ocean indicate the temporal variation of bomb‐14C in two decades is mainly through downward transfer through mixing with deeper waters. The observed bomb‐14C inventory in the northern Indian Ocean agrees with numerical model simulated values, except at the equatorial Indian Ocean. The high bomb‐14C inventory at the equator can be attributed to lateral advection of 14C‐enriched waters from the Pacific Ocean through the Indonesian archipelago. The air‐sea CO2exchange rates in the northern Indian Ocean calculated from the bomb‐14C inventories range from ∼7 mol m−2 yr−1 (in the northern Bay of Bengal) to 20 mol m−2 yr−1(in the equatorial Indian Ocean). Net sea‐air flux of CO2 estimated for the northern Indian Ocean between 0° and 25°N is ∼104 ± 30 TgC yr−1. The Bay of Bengal is a net sink of atmospheric CO2 (∼−1 ± 0.4 TgC yr−1), while the Arabian Sea is a source of CO2 (∼69 ± 21 TgC yr−1).
“…Based on the uncertainty in bomb-14 C inventory (15%) and the integral of the atmosphere-ocean D 14 C gradient (5%), the uncertainty of 14 C-based exchange rates estimated to $20%. Druffel and Griffin [2008] showed that for surface samples, the total uncertainty of a DIC D 14 C value at a given site over a several week period is approximately two times the reported uncertainty ($7‰). Thus, depending on the application, post-bomb D 14 C data should consider this shortterm variability of surface ocean D 14 C values and factor this into their analysis as it might affect the estimates of air-sea CO 2 exchange rates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Druffel and Griffin [2008] showed that for surface samples, the total uncertainty of a DIC D 14 C value at a given site over a several week period is approximately two times the reported uncertainty ($7‰). Thus, depending on the application, post-bomb D 14 C data should consider this shortterm variability of surface ocean D…”
The 14C measurements in the Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal during the late 1990s offer a way to assess the temporal changes in the inventories of bomb‐14C and its penetration into the ocean, in two decades since GEOSECS expeditions (1977–1978). The mean penetration depth of bomb radiocarbon during GEOSECS (1977–1978) was 270 m, which increased by ∼40% to 381 m in 1994–1998. The small changes in bomb‐14C inventories, significant increase in the mean penetration depths and lowering of the surface Δ14C values in the northern Indian Ocean indicate the temporal variation of bomb‐14C in two decades is mainly through downward transfer through mixing with deeper waters. The observed bomb‐14C inventory in the northern Indian Ocean agrees with numerical model simulated values, except at the equatorial Indian Ocean. The high bomb‐14C inventory at the equator can be attributed to lateral advection of 14C‐enriched waters from the Pacific Ocean through the Indonesian archipelago. The air‐sea CO2exchange rates in the northern Indian Ocean calculated from the bomb‐14C inventories range from ∼7 mol m−2 yr−1 (in the northern Bay of Bengal) to 20 mol m−2 yr−1(in the equatorial Indian Ocean). Net sea‐air flux of CO2 estimated for the northern Indian Ocean between 0° and 25°N is ∼104 ± 30 TgC yr−1. The Bay of Bengal is a net sink of atmospheric CO2 (∼−1 ± 0.4 TgC yr−1), while the Arabian Sea is a source of CO2 (∼69 ± 21 TgC yr−1).
“…The cause(s) of the apparent temporal DOC (Druffel and Griffin 2008), approximately 100‰ higher than that in 2015. This means that DOC produced from sinking POC would have a ∆ 14 C value that was approximately 100‰ higher in the 1980s than that in 2015.…”
We report marine dissolved organic carbon (DOC) ∆14C from seawater collected from the North central Pacific Ocean (NCP) in 2015. These measurements show DOC ∆14C values averaged –235±5‰ (n=3) in the mixed layer (24–81 m) and –544±5‰ (n=5) in the deep water (1500–5139 m). A comparison of these data with two previously published DOC ∆14C profiles from the NCP in 1985 and 1987 reveals that deep DOC ∆14C values have decreased. We discuss several possible mechanisms that could cause such a shift in DOC ∆14C values, including spatial inhomogeneity and temporal variability due to changes in the dissolution and ∆14C value of surface derived particles in the deep sea. We find that forthcoming profiles of DOC ∆14C results from the NCP will determine the primary mechanisms controlling deep DOC ∆14C distributions, and changes over the past three decades.
“…upwelling. (Druffel and Griffin 2008): the north central Pacific (1985, 1987 and 1999, circles), and the Sargasso Sea (1989 and2000, squares) and the dashed line is the least-squares fit of these data. …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seawater samples were collected from 00.5 m depth using a plastic bucket as described previously (Druffel and Griffin 2008). Sea surface temperature (SST) measurements were made using an ethanol thermometer (±0.2 C).…”
ABSTRACT. We report radiocarbon measurements of dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) in surface water samples collected daily during 12 cruises to Station M in the northeast Pacific off central California. Individual surface 14 C values ranged from 22‰ to 70‰ over 10 yr. Variability of average cruise values is highest during winter likely due to increased mixing. A general decrease of 14 C values was observed at a rate of about 3‰ per year between 1994 and 2004, about half of that in atmospheric CO 2 during this period (Levin and Kromer 2004). The 14 C results ranged from 218‰ during individual cruises and were often significantly larger than the total uncertainty for individual measurements (±3.9‰). This indicates that a single 14 C result from a surface site is not sufficient to capture the true variability of 14 C in the surface ocean.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.